MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979410550 · doi:10.1042/bio03901004

As precision medicine becomes more important, is it finally time for increased emphasis on gender medicine?

2017· article· en· W2979410550 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Biochemist · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMandatePolitical scienceInclusion (mineral)Alternative medicineCommissionMedical researchEuropean commissionMedicineManagementGerontologyEngineering ethicsSociologyLawEngineeringSocial scienceEuropean unionPathologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gender medicine is the topic of this issue of The Biochemist. In 2014, Francis Collins, Director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and Janine Clayton, Director of the Office of Research on Women's Health (ORWH) at NIH, announced that NIH would begin requiring all preclinical grant proposals to address sex as a biological variable1. The ORWH was set up in 1990 with the specific mandate to promote the inclusion of women and minority individuals in all clinical trials going forward2. Similar guidelines are imposed by the European Commission and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.401
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.124
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.304 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it